Posted tagged ‘Certiorari granted’

Judicial Watch Statement on U.S. Supreme Court’s Travel Ban Decision

June 26, 2017

Judicial Watch Statement on U.S. Supreme Court’s Travel Ban Decision, June 26, 2017

(Short and sweet. — DM)

Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued the following statement in response to today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning President Trump’s Executive Order that, among other anti-terrorist measures, temporarily restricts most travel from certain Middle East nations:

Today, in a historic decision, every Supreme Court justice agreed for now to reinstate practically all of President Trump’s executive order concerning travel. This is a major blow to anti-Trump activist judges on the lower courts.  And it is a big victory for our nation’s security, President Trump, and the rule of the law.  In light of today’s strong ruling, the Trump administration should consider additional steps to keep terrorists out of the United States.

Supreme Court revives Trump travel ban

June 26, 2017

Supreme Court revives Trump travel ban, Washington Times

(Please compare and contrast this article with the previously posted WaPo article. — DM)

The Supreme Court said Monday that most of President Trump’s travel ban executive order can go into effect, delivering the first major victory to the new administration on perhaps his most controversial policy to date.

Justices said the lower court rulings that blocked Mr. Trump’s policy were far too broad, and said the president can begin to enforce his ban against foreigners who don’t already have some ties to the U.S.

That means the president can begin denying visas to visitors from six countries — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — who don’t already have family in the U.S., or some other prior connection such as participation in an education program. Mr. Trump is also free to halt refugee admissions worldwide, with the same exception for people who already have a connection to the U.S.

The justices said Mr. Trump is at the peak of his powers when acting on national security concerns in immigration matters when dealing with people who don’t already have a tie to the U.S.

The court’s ruling was issued in an unsigned unanimous opinion, though Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch said they would have gone further and lifted the entire injunctions.

Justice Thomas said that the court’s ruling creates an impossible situation for the administration, which now must decide on who qualifies as already having ties to the U.S. and who doesn’t. He said to expect a rash of new lawsuits arguing over what level of connection is enough.

The court scheduled the broader case as part of its next session that begins in October — but pointedly suggested Mr. Trump may have concluded his broader review of U.S. visa policies by then, so there shouldn’t be a need to hear the case at all.

Two federal appeals courts had upheld injunctions of varying degrees of severity.

One court in Virginia ruled that Mr. Trump’s past words about Muslims showed an “animus” toward Muslims that invalidated the six-country travel ban, though they let the refugee restrictions remain in place. A court in California, though, struck down even the refugee restrictions, arguing the president broke the law because he never drew a specific connection between his actions and the national security concerns he said spurred him.